BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 18.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN and Crl.MP(MD)Nos.18261 & 17262 of 2025

1. Kasimayan, 2. Mithun Chakravarthi, ... Petitioners Vs

1. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Theni Police Station, Theni District.

Crime No.892/2019.

2. Kumaresan, ... Respondents PRAYER :-This Petition is filed under Section 528 BNSS, to call for the records pertaining in STC No.2772 of 2022 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Theni and quash the same as illegal against the petitioner.

For Petitioners : Ms.A.Banumathy, For Respondents : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, Additional Public Prosecutor for R1

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the final report in S.T.C. No.2772 of 2022 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Theni, filed against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 143 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code (corresponding to Sections 189(2) and 126(2) BNS).

2. The gist of the allegations in the final report is that the petitioners formed an unlawful assembly, obstructed traffic and protested against the speech made by one of the political leaders and thus committed the aforesaid offences.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the gist of the allegations against the petitioners is that they had formed an unlawful assembly, obstructed traffic and protested against the speech made by one of the political leaders; that even if the allegations are accepted to be true, they would only constitute the offence under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, besides Section 186 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for obstructing a public servant in the discharge of his public functions; and that their right to protest cannot be termed as causing wrongful restraint or unlawful assembly, and therefore, the impugned prosecution is liable to be quashed. He would rely upon the judgment of this Court in Jeevanandham and others vs. State rep. by Inspector of Police, Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District and another, reported in 2018-2-L.W.(Crl.) 606

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the first respondent would reiterate the allegations in the final report and submit that, in violation of the order passed under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners assembled in a public place and indulged in an illegal protest, and therefore, the aforesaid offences are made out, and sought for dismissal of this petition.

5. As stated earlier, the only allegations against the petitioners are that they had protested against a statement made by a political leader in a public place and that they had violated the order passed by a public servant.

6. As regards the offences under Sections 341 and 143 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, in the case of Jeevanandham, referred to supra, which related to a protest without valid permission and when the accused had filed quash petition of the final report filed for the offences under Sections 143 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code, this Court had held as follows:

“26. Crl.O.P.(MD).Nos. 11834, 15529, 15644, 15621, 16244, 16208, 16075 of 2018 In all these cases, it is seen that a Final Report has been filed for an Offence under Section 188 and 143 of IPC and cognizance has also been taken by the concerned Judicial Magistrates. In view of the above discussion, the cognizance of the Final Report under Section 188 of IPC is liable to be quashed. Insofar as the offence under Section 143 of IPC is concerned, in all the cases, the concerned Police Officer has quoted Section 30(2) of the Police Act, and therefore, has straight away proceeded to register an FIR under Section 143 of IPC. As stated above, a mere violation of the so-called promulgation under Section 30(2) of the Police Act will not make out an offence under Section 143 of IPC by straight away declaring an assembly of persons to be an unlawful assembly. The power under Section 30(2) of